Bill de Blasio corrects AOC's claim about spending Amazon tax break money

[Dontrike]

1. You don't understand how projection works

The word projection isn't in what you quoted. You're spouting randomness.

[lolpve]

Open question, who is dumber AOC or Hank Johnson?

[Dontrike]

Open question, who is dumber AOC or Hank Johnson?

Open question, what does that have to do with anything?

[Grapemask]

How would america look if AOC was president (without advisors), probably like Venezuela 2.0

Depends on if we mean the Fox News caricature of Cortez or the real Cortez.

As a sign of just how successful the intellectually dishonest horseshit is, this thread has pushed the narrative far enough that the left is agreeing - either through silence or by letting the argument's foundation lay at Horseshit Hill - that Cortez is stupid or even that she ever believed what the OP's story claims. Arguments like "why are you obsessed with her" or just "yeah, and?" Rather than the needed "what you are saying is blatantly false, let's begin this argument again from a truthful footing." Cortez never claimed a suitcase of money or an equivalent was being handed off between New York and Amazon, though she may have taken to shorthand to describe the tax incentive such that horseshit peddlers could dig up a full scoop's worth.

[I Push Buttons]

Cortez never claimed a suitcase of money or an equivalent was being handed off between New York and Amazon, though she may have taken to shorthand to describe the tax incentive such that horseshit peddlers could dig up a full scoop's worth.

She did though... Multiple times over months.

Here is one from just the other day upon reports Amazon will pay $0 in federal taxes:

Amazon is paying $0 in taxes on $11+ billion in profit.

$0 for schools.
$0 for firefighters.
$0 for infrastructure.
$0 for research and healthcare.

Why should corporations that contribute nothing to the pot be in a position to take billions from the public?

[Grapemask]

She did though... Multiple times over months.

Here is one from just the other day upon reports Amazon will pay $0 in federal taxes:

In tax incentives. This is that clear and obvious shorthand that any functional adult is able to to understand. Given that you pushed buttons such that you ended up at this website, we can obviously conclude that you're not a complete idiot. So why are you either pretending to be, or assuming that we are?

[Bodakane]

AOC was talking about the tax money that Amazon was not going to have to pay. She's right. Those mega corps shouldn't get tax breaks like that. Until we stop letting them hold us hostage, then it won't ever stop.

[Ashrynn]

AOC was talking about the tax money that Amazon was not going to have to pay. She's right. Those mega corps shouldn't get tax breaks like that. Until we stop letting them hold us hostage, then it won't ever stop.

She was. And then she directly said that they could use the money instead for new teachers and rebuilding the subway system.

I agree that the tax breaks shouldn't be given to any corp. There should not be a deal on the table like that, BUT... NYC needed the jobs and the revenue. If she had another solution... fine, but that wasn't the goal here. She directly stated that the money from the tax breaks(i.e. not any money they currently have) would go to new teachers and the subway.

There is no way to dance around it, she made a dumb gaff. Trump does it all the time, just call it out as stupid. I agree with the spirit of what she was doing, but there is a harsh reality at work here that she's not really acknowledging.

-=-=-

Also, there is some stuff to be said to about this. Maybe Amazon moving in would have changed the community too much. Or maybe the jobs just would all go to outsiders who would like gentrify or something right? But as it stands NYC has no money coming in and no jobs to provide anyone and it just lost it's ability to become the next big tech bubble which would only have meant more jobs and more revenue from taxes.

[Draco-Onis]

She was. And then she directly said that they could use the money instead for new teachers and rebuilding the subway system.

I agree that the tax breaks shouldn't be given to any corp. There should not be a deal on the table like that, BUT... NYC needed the jobs and the revenue. If she had another solution... fine, but that wasn't the goal here. She directly stated that the money from the tax breaks(i.e. not any money they currently have) would go to new teachers and the subway.

There is no way to dance around it, she made a dumb gaff. Trump does it all the time, just call it out as stupid. I agree with the spirit of what she was doing, but there is a harsh reality at work here that she's not really acknowledging.

-=-=-

Also, there is some stuff to be said to about this. Maybe Amazon moving in would have changed the community too much. Or maybe the jobs just would all go to outsiders who would like gentrify or something right? But as it stands NYC has no money coming in and no jobs to provide anyone and it just lost it's ability to become the next big tech bubble which would only have meant more jobs and more revenue from taxes.

Here's the thing though NYC is not struggling for jobs or revenue, the city is pretty much at full employment and they were going to build in an up and coming neighborhood. The problem with NYC revenue is not the money itself but abysmal mismanagement due to ego clashing.

But I agree she gaffed there.

[Ashrynn]

Here's the thing though NYC is not struggling for jobs or revenue, the city is pretty much at full employment and they were going to build in an up and coming neighborhood. The problem with NYC revenue is not the money itself but abysmal mismanagement due to ego clashing.

But I agree she gaffed there.

Ah, I'm in CA so not as familiar with NYC politics(i.e. very, very little). I know they need funds for infrastructure spending, but you can't deny that the deal would have given them that. Although again the killing of this deal will only lead to more ego clashing imo so maybe this is worse than I thought??

[Draco-Onis]

Ah, I'm in CA so not as familiar with NYC politics(i.e. very, very little). I know they need funds for infrastructure spending, but you can't deny that the deal would have given them that. Although again the killing of this deal will only lead to more ego clashing imo so maybe this is worse than I thought??

it is because the mayor and the governor have been running for president for years therefore they are trying to avoid solving problems that make them look bad and spend more time finger pointing at each other than anything. The city does not really need funds but it has more than enough of it but no one is doing the necessary reforms needed. It's a very long explanation but there is special interest, corruption and even scandals involved including Deblasio firing a watchdog for getting too close to his corruption.

[Ashrynn]

it is because the mayor and the governor have been running for president for years therefore they are trying to avoid solving problems that make them look bad and spend more time finger pointing at each other than anything. The city does not really need funds but it has more than enough of it but no one is doing the necessary reforms needed. It's a very long explanation but there is special interest, corruption and even scandals involved including Deblasio firing a watchdog for getting too close to his corruption.

I'll admit, I want to look more into this before I comment further. It seems like the politics in NYC are rotten to the core though.

[Grapemask]

She was. And then she directly said that they could use the money instead for new teachers and rebuilding the subway system.

Alright, let's back up here. Like the last guy, we know you're not stupid. So you're either pretending to be or assuming that we're stupid.

If a tax incentive is not given, that tax must then be paid. If that tax is paid, then that amount in revenue is collected, and that revenue can then be spent on other things. That includes new teachers and rebuilding the subway system.

This is not a gaff. This is simple logic that a third grader can understand. Why do rightwing narratives revolve around a mental capacity lower than a third grader's?

[Trifle]

I can only assume that they think the only options are "Amazon comes and pays no tax" and "Amazon doesn't come", whereas Cortez was positing a hypothetical "Amazon comes and pays it's tax like a good corporate citizen".

[Ashrynn]

Alright, let's back up here. Like the last guy, we know you're not stupid. So you're either pretending to be or assuming that we're stupid.

If a tax incentive is not given, that tax must then be paid. If that tax is paid, then that amount in revenue is collected, and that revenue can then be spent on other things. That includes new teachers and rebuilding the subway system.

This is not a gaff. This is simple logic that a third grader can understand. Why do rightwing narratives revolve around a mental capacity lower than a third grader's?

A. I'm sorry, but if I'm going to be honest I'll say you're either a troll or stupid. But my comment was not directed at you originally.

B. A Tax incentive is not NY taking money and handing it to Amazon. So therefore if that tax is not collected then the money is just a net 0 period. It doesn't mean NYC now has $3Billion in magic money that just appeared by not doing this deal. AOC has been on record, multiple times, stating that NYC could instead use the tax incentives to repair the city and hire more teachers.

C. This is either a gaff or AOC really doesn't understand economics. As far as your third-grader comment goes.... Well yes, this is exactly how a third grader would view things. AOC has the mental capacity of a third-grader, much like yourself, and clearly isn't capable of thinking beyond that of a third grader. See, I'm not that harsh, but if you want to call yourselves children go for it.

[Felya]

A Tax incentive is not NY taking money and handing it to Amazon. So therefore if that tax is not collected then the money is just a net 0 period. It doesn't mean NYC now has $3Billion in magic money that just appeared by not doing this deal. AOC has been on record, multiple times, stating that NYC could instead use the tax incentives to repair the city and hire more teachers.

But, if the tax credit wasn’t given, they would have that revenue to spend on other things?

This is either a gaff or AOC really doesn't understand economics. As far as your third-grader comment goes.... Well yes, this is exactly how a third grader would view things. AOC has the mental capacity of a third-grader, much like yourself, and clearly isn't capable of thinking beyond that of a third grader. See, I'm not that harsh, but if you want to call yourselves children go for it.

No, this is the argument every single city that gets tax payer dollars to build new stadiums. The savings to the team, in this case Amazon, is supposed to be eventually covered by tax revenue collected from surrounding businesses and the team it self. If we use the logic that billionaires get incentives, because of future earnings in sports teams, I don’t understand how Age of Conan is the problem.

If there is a budget short fall, since increased traffic and infrastructure needs in the area, can we blame Amazon then? Does their incentive being net 0, mean that their impact on state spending will be 0? I know it’s different... but, you should read up on what Boeing was getting away with in Seattle, before MS and Amazon. Just 10 years ago, the Puget Sound government signed off on building a new on-ramp from 405 to 167, because Boeing threatened to leave. The catch? They still are actively building, I believe, the third attempt at an “on-ramp” since then. The first was a need to act quick for Boeing, so it was a cluster fuck. I actually don’t know what happened to the second, I moved to West Seattle. But, now am back, and we are getting a freaking overpass... no more additional lanes or extending exit lanes... nope... we get an overpass... I assure you, the net loss was more than 0, but at least Boeing paid taxes.

[petej0]

But, if the tax credit wasn’t given, they would have that revenue to spend on other things?



No, this is the argument every single city that gets tax payer dollars to build new stadiums. The savings to the team, in this case Amazon, is supposed to be eventually covered by tax revenue collected from surrounding businesses and the team it self. If we use the logic that billionaires get incentives, because of future earnings in sports teams, I don’t understand how Age of Conan is the problem.

If there is a budget short fall, since increased traffic and infrastructure needs in the area, can we blame Amazon then? Does their incentive being net 0, mean that their impact on state spending will be 0? I know it’s different... but, you should read up on what Boeing was getting away with in Seattle, before MS and Amazon. Just 10 years ago, the Puget Sound government signed off on building a new on-ramp from 405 to 167, because Boeing threatened to leave. The catch? They still are actively building, I believe, the third attempt at an “on-ramp” since then. The first was a need to act quick for Boeing, so it was a cluster fuck. I actually don’t know what happened to the second, I moved to West Seattle. But, now am back, and we are getting a freaking overpass... no more additional lanes or extending exit lanes... nope... we get an overpass... I assure you, the net loss was more than 0, but at least Boeing paid taxes.

From what I have been hearing, is that it would benefit NY(C) to the tune of $27B over ten years while getting a tax break of $3b over that same time. I dont know where they come up with that number but lets say the benefit is a third of that. $9b over ten years while getting $3b in tax breaks. That means NY(C) is getting $9b more than they would have without Amazon. If Amazon didnt get a tax break it would be $12B instead.

Tax incentives aside and corps not paying their fair share aside. Having a multi-billion dollar companies HQ in your city has to be a huge advantage. Add to that Amazon with all the STEM jobs it could create and spin off (as employees get hired and exit). Not to mention keeping STEM grads in your state instead of fleeing for careers in other States. Lets also not forget what types of businesses would start-up or move to NY(C) to be closer or withing commuting distance to a Tech Business park located near the HQ. I think NY(C) lost a good opportunity to be generate an opportunity to be the East Coast Silicon Valley.

Stadiums dont generate the kind of jobs(or tax revenue for that matter) a Tech HQ would generate.

[Hilhen7]

Funny how big businesses want to get a break, but your local small business has to pay it's full tax.

What's the deal? Shouldn't all businesses get the same pro rated incentive? Just another example how the wealth gap grows more and more over time.

[Felya]

From what I have been hearing, is that it would benefit NY(C) to the tune of $27B over ten years while getting a tax break of $3b over that same time. I dont know where they come up with that number but lets say the benefit is a third of that. $9b over ten years while getting $3b in tax breaks. That means NY(C) is getting $9b more than they would have without Amazon. If Amazon didnt get a tax break it would be $12B instead.

Tax incentives aside and corps not paying their fair share aside. Having a multi-billion dollar companies HQ in your city has to be a huge advantage. Add to that Amazon with all the STEM jobs it could create and spin off (as employees get hired and exit). Not to mention keeping STEM grads in your state instead of fleeing for careers in other States. Lets also not forget what types of businesses would start-up or move to NY(C) to be closer or withing commuting distance to a Tech Business park located near the HQ. I think NY(C) lost a good opportunity to be generate an opportunity to be the East Coast Silicon Valley.

Stadiums dont generate the kind of jobs(or tax revenue for that matter) a Tech HQ would generate.

We are talking about NYC. This isn’t Nashville. How much would Amazon cost the city in infrastructure? What happens if Amazon flops in 7 years?

[petej0]

We are talking about NYC. This isn’t Nashville. How much would Amazon cost the city in infrastructure? What happens if Amazon flops in 7 years?

I cant say because I am not a civil engineer in NYC. I am also not privy to the full extent of Amazons plans or the area they were targeting. Having said that, Amazon should have to pay for what every infrastructure they need for the immediate area (parking, ramps and roads to Business park etc). As for the NYC infrastructure, it isnt like NY is leading the nation in infrastructure. I am sure the $9B they get in increased revenues and additional revenues from added wealth being attracted would help cover any needed costs.

NYC has issues heating public housing and low rent housing. I bet they could use whatever extra revenue they can get.